Pakistan will not apologise to Bangladesh: Qureshi

[cactuslily58]

An answer must be given for interfering in a sovereign and independent country.

Would Pakistan like to answer for what it did & is doing in Afghanistan ?

 

[salman nedian]

How limited were these activities?... Well let me guess... Very.

Further, why were these activities taking place? They started off due to your the then government treating its own population as second class.

We were not there in the earliest stages; we came in much later; we did not "initiate" these.

Stop accusing India for your own country's mistake.

What ever mistakes we did again its our internal matter and India were training Mukti Bahinis before the operation and war which is a fact. So India was involved in cross border terrorism.

 

[salman nedian]

Would Pakistan like to answer for what it did & is doing in Afghanistan ?

The source of inspiration was your action of 1971.

 

[vish]

What ever mistakes we did again its our internal matter and India were training Mukti Bahinis before the operation and war which is a fact. So India was involved in cross border terrorism.

Your mistakes were causing us dear. That is why, we stepped in. Our initial support was nothing but pea-shooting. Its once we realized that this is our problem that we chose to step in.

If I go by your definition, every country in the world is into cross boder terrorism.

 

[cactuslily58]

The source of inspiration was your action of 1971.

Assuming for a moment that what you have mentioned is correct... what was the Afgan inspiration for objecting to entry of Pak in the UN way back in "47 ?

It is encouraging to know that Pak gets inspiration from India... there is light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[salman nedian]

Your mistakes were causing us dear. That is why, we stepped in. Our initial support was nothing but pea-shooting. Its once we realized that this is our problem that we chose to step in.

If I go by your definition, every country in the world is into cross boder terrorism.

Even today thousands of Bangladeshis are crossing border so now what are u doing?

 

[vish]

Even today thousands of Bangladeshis are crossing border so now what are u doing?

Why are they crossing? Not because they are being nihilated, but because they seek a better life in India.

 

[salman nedian]

Why are they crossing? Not because they are being nihilated, but because they seek a better life in India.

So when they were crossing borders in 1971 they were security threat and now they are not; it shows the evil game of India. The expansionist desires of India are no more secret and they wanted to make Bangladesh their satellite state but people of Bangladesh liberated themselves from India as well.

The truth is that India never accepted Pakistan and they will work against Pakistan. I think it’s a lesson for Bangladeshi members here as well that they committed a mistake in 1971.

 

[Flintlock]

So when they were crossing borders in 1971 they were security threat and now they are not; it shows the evil game of India. The expansionist desires of India are no more secret and they wanted to make Bangladesh their satellite state but people of Bangladesh liberated themselves from India as well.

The truth is that India never accepted Pakistan and they will work against Pakistan. I think it’s a lesson for Bangladeshi members here as well that they committed a mistake in 1971.

The problem with conspiracy theories is that they choose facts that support their argument selectively.

India definitely wants to exert influence over her neighbours. However, these cannot be termed as "expansionist" desires. Every country tries to influence affairs to secure its own strategic objectives. Big countries have a big areas of influence, that's all.
However, you are fooling yourselves by using terms like "evil game" etc.

For example, Bhutan is a satellite state of India. However, this can hardly be called an "evil" influence. Bhutan has done very well for itself. It has shaped its society in the Bhutanese way - low consumption but healthy lifestyle. They have managed free and fair elections - something "free" Pakistan still has trouble doing. India does not exercise undue influence over its internal affairs, and both countries help each other in anti-terror operations, etc. etc.

In Nepal, India helped to bring the civil war to an end by drawing all the parties to the negotiating table and holding elections. Nepalese politicians were invited to tour India and learn about our systems, which they criticized to their heart's content. India still trains the Nepalese army, and is negotiating a change in the relationship based on the Nepalese desire for distance from India.

Pakistan, let me remind you, has been far more active in influencing events in its neighbourhood. You guys have done things that are disproportionate to your size and power, and none of them have been benign.

The idea is "I scratch your back, and you scratch mine". However, if you put your ideological blinkers on and refuse to negotiate, then you suffer, and keep playing the blame game.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It became our concern when the millions of refugees started pouring in. Most of these were very pissed off and would have wrecked the law and order inside our territory.

The approval for supporting a violent armed group, the Mukti Bahini, was given much earlier than when the refugee crisis became a major issue, not to mention that the Indian Government actually voted to open the borders to refugees as well. Allowing refugees to come in and then claiming that is the reason for going to war is disingenuous to say the least.

As someone already mentioned, Indira Gandhi would have gone to war 6 or 7 moths earlier, had it not been for Manekshaw's insistence that he needed time to prepare. Refugees at that time were no where close to the level that they ended up being at, so again the argument that the refugees forced India's hand is shown to be invalid, since the intent to initiate aggression existed far earlier.

 

[vish]

The approval for supporting a violent armed group, the Mukti Bahini, was given much earlier than when the refugee crisis became a major issue, not to mention that the Indian Government actually voted to open the borders to refugees as well. Allowing refugees to come in and then claiming that is the reason for going to war is disingenuous to say the least.

As someone already mentioned, Indira Gandhi would have gone to war 6 or 7 moths earlier, had it not been for Manekshaw's insistence that he needed time to prepare. Refugees at that time were no where close to the level that they ended up being at, so again the argument that the refugees forced India's hand is shown to be invalid, since the intent to initiate aggression existed far earlier.

When did I deny that Mukti Bahini wasn't active earlier? The support was nowhere near the level that can be termed significant and effective. It was nothing more than poking back then. Serious stuff started when everyone realized things hit the fan.

As far as opening the doors to refugees is concerned, what choice did we have?

A question I'll ask: why were these refugees fleeing in the first place?

Indira Gandhi wanted an early war because she wanted to stem the tide of refugees which she had enough foresight to soo would end up becoming a tsunami. Plus, the world was going to jack about this issue; she wanted to enter and set things in order before a status quo unfavorable to us would be set in place. You would not have taken those refugees back even if you had East Pakistan under control.

AM: I am not denying that we did not interfere (wonder what Bangladeshis think about this); my question is what choice did we have? Your leaders screwed up and paid the price.

 

[salman nedian]

When did I deny that Mukti Bahini wasn't active earlier? The support was nowhere near the level that can be termed significant and effective. It was nothing more than poking back then. Serious stuff started when everyone realized things hit the fan.

As far as opening the doors to refugees is concerned, what choice did we have?

A question I'll ask: why were these refugees fleeing in the first place?

Indira Gandhi wanted an early because she wanted to stem the tide of refugees which she had enough foresight to soo would end up becoming a tsunami. Plus, the world was going to jack about this issue; she wanted to enter and set things in order before a status quo unfavorable to us would be set in place. You would not have taken those refugees back even if you had East Pakistan under control.

AM: I am not denying that we did not interfere (wonder what Bangladeshis think about this); my question is what choice did we have? Your leaders screwed up and paid the price.

This is a pathetic question, your government should have closed the borders if they were thinking that those refuges were security threat but the prime concern of India was to disintegrate Pakistan that’s why they gave their support to Mukti Bahini.

You didn’t have any choice fortunately (for you) you got opportunity and you avail that. Simple is that!

There is no justification for aggression on an independent country.

Why India even today is so much interested in spreading hatred between 2 countries (when our relations are improving) by raising voice for trial of PA personnel? Why can’t they keep their mouth shut now? It’s no more their matter and Pakistan and Bangladesh have to solve this by them selves. Now no refugees are flowing into India so it’s better to allow both the countries to resolve this issue by their own.

 

[vish]

This is a pathetic question, your government should have closed the borders if they were thinking that those refuges were security threat but the prime concern of India was to disintegrate Pakistan that’s why they gave their support to Mukti Bahini.

Closing borders is easy? Stopping flow of refugees is easy?

The primary purpose of India in providing limited support to Mukti Bahini was to poke you. We gave them serious thought once we realized things have hit the fan.

You didn’t have any choice fortunately (for you) you got opportunity and you avail that. Simple is that!

We had no choice; either we live with the mess your mistakes created or we put the house in order. Not much of choice I would say.

There is no justification for aggression on an independent country.

Depends on the context.

Why India even today is so much interested in spreading hatred between 2 countries (when our relations are improving) by raising voice for trial of PA personnel? Why can’t they keep their mouth shut now? It’s no more their matter and Pakistan and Bangladesh have to solve this by them selves. Now no refugees are flowing into India so it’s better to allow both to countries to resolve this issue by their own.

Nothing but speculation on your part.

 

[salman nedian]

I have not seen any feed back from Bangladeshi members on this issue. They must answer it that after the apology from the President of Pakistan is their any thing left? Can we move forward now? Can we make a block or union?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM: I am not denying that we did not interfere (wonder what Bangladeshis think about this); my question is what choice did we have? Your leaders screwed up and paid the price.

Well staying out of a sovereign nations affairs, and not in fact intervening to make them worse, which is what support for the Mukti Bahini did (so India does take some blame for inflaming the situation to the point it eventually arrived at), would be an excellent suggestion.

Nations make policy mistakes all the time, it is for them to sort it out, not for hostile neighbors to intervene and make things worse, and then invade. There was no 'goodness of heart' on the part of India here - it was a cold calculated move to damage Pakistan -starting from the initial support before things got really out of hand, till the end.